u/East-Brick-9283

He turns 50 today. May his leadership endure for decades to come.

Source: https://unctad.org/publication/world-investment-report-2025

I might be in the minority here, but I think Ethiopia would be much more stable if the current regional states were broken down into their zonal subdivisions.

A lot of the instability we see today comes from ethnic tensions. Whether people support or oppose ethnic federalism, it's hard to deny that having huge regions associated with one dominant ethnic group increases competition and mistrust between groups.

I see some people suggesting getting rid of the current map entirely and bringing back historical provinces like Shewa, Begemder, Hararghe, etc., or creating new regions based on geography (such as river basins or just directions) rather than ethnicity. I don't think that would solve the problem.

Imagine a restored Shewa province, for example. Aside from being unrealistic, it would contain large Oromo, Amhara, Gurage, and other populations all under one regional government. Questions would immediately arise on what language the province would use, what cultural identity would it have, which historical narrative would it promote etc.

People seem to assume that if you remove ethnic labels from the map, ethnic politics will disappear. But people don't stop being Oromo, Amhara, Gurage, Somali, etc., just because a boundary changes. Instead, those groups would end up competing for control of the same provincial government. The conflict doesn't disappear it simply shifts to a different level.

Breaking regions into zones seems like a more practical and reasonable solution.

For one, it's actually possible. Ethiopia has already reorganized regions before. SNNPR was split into multiple regions only a few years ago, so major administrative changes aren't some impossible dream. Yes, SNNPR is unique since its not a single ethnic group region, but the point is there is a constitutional precident.

Second, zones are much smaller. Most have populations in the hundreds of thousands or low millions rather than tens of millions. Smaller governments are easier to manage, easier to hold accountable, and less likely to become powerful political actors in their own right.

Take Oromia, for example. It alone covers roughly one-third of Ethiopia's land area and contains around 40–50 million people. Not only that, but it spans areas with vastly different economic needs. You cannot realistically create policies that effectively serve both a fruit farmer in the lush hills of Wallaga and a Borana pastoralist herding cattle across arid shrublands at the same time. However, independent Wallaga and Borana regions could tailor policies to their own local realities.

Third, a common identity can be established much more easily at the zonal level. East Shewa would use Afaan Oromo and have a Tulama-Oromo identity. West Gojjam would use Amharic and have a Gojjame-Amhara identity. Sitti would use Somali and have an Issa-Somali identity, and so on.

Fourth, it lowers the stakes of ethnic competition. Today, controlling a regional government means controlling a massive territory, budget, bureaucracy, and political base. If power were spread across dozens of zones instead, no single administration would be powerful enough to dominate national politics. As things stand, it is difficult to imagine anyone outside the Oromia and Amhara regional blocs consistently competing for federal power. A zonal system would help balance that dynamic.

Most importantly, it avoids both extremes. It avoids huge ethnic regions on one hand, and it avoids forcing several major ethnic groups into large provinces where they would constantly compete for dominance on the other.

No system is perfect, and ethnic tensions wouldn't magically disappear overnight. But if the goal is reducing conflict rather than simply redrawing the map, a zonal system seems like an idea worth discussing.

Its between Tigray, Oromia and Somali region imo.